Boardroom Meeting Unexpected Ending

“It is our conclusion, based on the facts detailed in the Committee's Report, that the Russian intelligence services' assault on the integrity of the 2016 U.S. electoral process and Trump and his associates' participation in and enabling ofthis Russian activity, represents one of the single most grave counterintelligence threats to American national security in the modem era.”

— Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, 8/18/20

This is a QUOTE of somebody saying it was real, this is not PROOF. There's more proof of Obama collusion to frame Trump than actual collusion with Russia.
The democrats are shitting their pants right now hoping they won't all go to prison.

It’s a QUOTE from the Senate REPORT released yesterday. See for yourself, Page 962:

https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/report_volume5.pdf

Yeah, more of the same crap. Same shit different day

Oh, so didn’t read it and you’re not going to read it? In a sense, I can’t blame you. It would require a level of open-mindedness of which you’re clearly incapable.

That’s okay. Those of us who read it know better, and remember what you were taught in school: knowledge is power.

"Page 962" of a senate report. Page 962, did you read the whole report or just page 962?
You're sending me a quote from page 962 of a report, and in that quote there is still no evidence of collusion.
Why don't you send me page with the evidence of collusion? Oh, you must not have read the whole report... or you just chose to send a quote about collusion and not the actual proof of collusion. Either way knowledge is something you lack and no amount of schooling can teach you basic critical thinking skills. You are hopeless.

The only section of the report which claims there was no collusion was under the GOP Senators’ notes...big shocker. But you know that already, right? Because you read the report.

Read the evidence.

I'm not reading a thousand page report when you haven't even read it!

Go read the report and find the evidence retard.

Why wouldn’t you read the report? Do you want someone else to tell you what to think or do you want to be able to know and defend your position?

I mean, remaining willfully ignorant and allowing your opinions to be dictated by someone else is kind of how the country got to where it is today. That’s what sheep do, and lazy ones at that.

Why don't you read the report, you keep quoting it, yet you haven't even read it? You want me to read the report for you is that it? I'm not an idiot, if they had any evidence they would provide it, but yet again, all they have is opinions. JUST. LIKE. YOU.

The Washington press corps seems engaged in a collective demonstration of the legal concept of willful blindness, or deliberately ignoring the facts, following the release of yet another declassified document which directly refutes prior statements about the investigation into Russia collusion. The document shows that FBI officials used a national security briefing of then candidate Donald Trump and his top aides to gather possible evidence for Crossfire Hurricane, its code name for the Russia investigation.

It is astonishing that the media refuses to see what is one of the biggest stories in decades. The Obama administration targeted the campaign of the opposing party based on false evidence. The media covered Obama administration officials ridiculing the suggestions of spying on the Trump campaign and of improper conduct with the Russia investigation. When Attorney General William Barr told the Senate last year that he believed spying did occur, he was lambasted in the media, including by James Comey and others involved in that investigation. The mocking "wow" response of the fired FBI director received extensive coverage.

The new document shows that, in summer 2016, FBI agent Joe Pientka briefed Trump campaign advisers Michael Flynn and Chris Christie over national security issues, standard practice ahead of the election. It had a discussion of Russian interference. But this was different. The document detailing the questions asked by Trump and his aides and their reactions was filed several days after that meeting under Crossfire Hurricane and Crossfire Razor, the FBI investigation of Flynn. The two FBI officials listed who approved the report are Kevin Clinesmith and Peter Strzok.

Clinesmith is the former FBI lawyer responsible for the FISA surveillance conducted on members of the Trump campaign. He opposed Trump and sent an email after the election declaring "viva the resistance." He is now under review for possible criminal charges for altering a FISA court filing. The FBI used Trump adviser Carter Page as the basis for the original FISA application, due to his contacts with Russians. After that surveillance was approved, however, federal officials discredited the collusion allegations and noted that Page was a CIA asset. Clinesmith had allegedly changed the information to state that Page was not working for the CIA.

Second, FBI agents had warned that dossier author Christopher Steele may have been used by Russian intelligence to plant false information to disrupt the election. His source for the most serious allegations claims that Steele misrepresented what he had said and that it was little more than rumors that were recast by Steele as reliable intelligence.

Third, the Obama administration had been told that the basis for the FISA application was dubious and likely false. Yet it continued the investigation, and then someone leaked its existence to the media. Another declassified document shows that, after the New York Times ran a leaked story on the investigation, even Strzok had balked at the account as misleading and inaccurate. His early 2017 memo affirmed that there was no evidence of any individuals in contact with Russians. This information came as the collusion stories were turning into a frenzy that would last years.

Fourth, the investigation by special counsel Robert Mueller and inspectors general found no evidence of collusion or knowing contact between the Trump campaign and Russian officials. What inspectors general did find were false statements or possible criminal conduct by Comey and others. While unable to say it was the reason for their decisions, they also found statements of animus against Trump and his campaign by the FBI officials who were leading the investigation. Former Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein testified he never would have approved renewal of the FISA surveillance and encouraged further investigation into such bias.

 ups, <1h

Strzok is the FBI agent whose violation of FBI rules led Justice Department officials to refer him for possible criminal charges. Strzok did not hide his intense loathing of Trump and famously referenced an "insurance policy" if Trump were to win the election. After FBI officials concluded there was no evidence of any crime by Flynn at the end of 2016, Strzok prevented the closing of the investigation as FBI officials searched for any crime that might be used to charge the incoming national security adviser.

Documents show Comey briefed President Obama and Vice President Joe Biden on the investigation shortly before the inauguration of Trump. When Comey admitted the communications between Flynn and Russian officials appeared legitimate, Biden reportedly suggested using the Logan Act, a law widely seen as unconstitutional and never been used to successfully convict a single person, as an alternative charge against Flynn. The memo contradicts eventual claims by Biden that he did not know about the Flynn investigation. Let us detail some proven but mostly unseen facts.

First, the Russia collusion allegations were based in large  part on the dossier funded by the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee. The Clinton campaign repeatedly denied paying for the dossier until after the election, when it was confronted with irrefutable evidence that the money had been buried among legal expenditures. As New York Times reporter Maggie Haberman wrote, "Folks involved in funding this lied about it and with sanctimony for a year."

Finally, Obama and Biden were aware of the investigation, as were the administration officials who publicly ridiculed Trump when he said there was spying on his campaign. Others, like House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, declared they had evidence of collusion but never produced it. Countless reporters, columnists, and analysts still continue to deride, as writer Max Boot said it, the spinning of "absurd conspiracy theories" about how the FBI "supposedly spied on the Trump campaign."

Willful blindness has its advantages. The media covered the original leak and the collusion narrative, despite mounting evidence that it was false. They filled hours of cable news shows and pages of print with a collusion story discredited by the FBI. Virtually none of these journalists or experts have acknowledged that the collusion leaks were proven false, let alone pursue the troubling implications of national security powers being used to target the political opponents of an administration. But in Washington, success often depends not on what you see but what you can unsee.

And you demonstrate the same willful blindness by ignoring:

“The Committee did not seek to prove or disprove the assertions in the dossier. Instead, the Committee explored Steele's methodology, explored the information available on Steele's subsources, examined how the FBI handled Steele as a source, and sought to understand how the FBI investigated the assertions in Steele's reporting.”

Since everything you’ve already stated has been public knowledge for years, no smoking guns there, you clearly still haven’t read it.

Their conclusions state nothing about Clinton, Comey, Biden or anyone else other than Trump.

Spin it any way you wish.

By the way, you know the REPORT includes PROOF, right? That’s how they reached an official CONCLUSION.

now watch this
https://youtu.be/xL0Gv46Xy44

That’s mildly amusing. Now you should watch this:
https://youtu.be/oHg5SJYRHA0